Graphics, story, gameplay and controls are a mixed bag, pretty much 50/50.

The graphics have decent textures, lighting and effects, but there's an overuse of bloom when outdoors in the sun.

The story is original and takes the player on a cognitive dissonance journey, but loses it's immersion due to arcade gratuitous violence (even onscreen marksman achievements). It makes it hard to at the same time feel a sense of immorality when they constantly award the player for headshots and even suggest you need to kill wounded enemies before you can get their ammo.

Gameplay wise there are some visceral challenging battles where you have to carefully manage squad commands, positioning, weapons, and ammo, yet others are a bit too easy, allowing you to stay in cover and have your squad do all the work. The AI is pretty good though, both friendly and foe. There are many scripted moments for cinematic effect, and in some harder battles it's as if your squad suddenly become invulnerable to deal with the added level of challenge.

Controls are OK with aiming and shooting, but could be much better regarding cover and movement. Aiming while in cover however is sometimes frustrating if going for an acute downward or side angle.

I'd rate it about 7.5/10 overall. I dock it more for it's story and poor fit with the nature of the gaemplay than the gameplay itself though. I feel this kind of story would better fit games like I Am Alive or The Last of Us, where true dissonance is felt stronger and there are more clear choices on how you interact with characters.

This is sort of a Lost story, where they thrust you into a situation where you mostly have no choice but to do a lot of killing, and the few places you can choose seem to have little if any impact. It's as if they wrote it with no clear intended meaning (other than madness) and want the players to come up with their own.

In short, it relies on shock value too much, and in too arcade a way to have any lasting impact.

That's hardly a spoiler. Nothing was revealed about the story or the gameplay with either choice other than it being a good battle. The option to surrender or fight is obvious at that point of the game.

Honestly, if you are THAT sensitive to what you're calling spoilers, you probably should be playing the game instead of reading threads about it.

For that matter, many have played through the game, even more than once, never realizing that battle can be fought and won. So they never enjoy it until they hear people say such things about it.

Goes both ways "dude", chill out. The thread title is Spec Ops: The Line GAMEPLAY. Even if I HAD mentioned details of that battle, which I didn't, it would have been on topic.

I agree on play it before judging it, and "no one on console likes it" is not only untrue, it's not exactly a broad cross section of player opinions even if it were. That's the reverse of saying people on the official forums of games generally like them, well, duh, many are fanboys.

The fact is if one were to omit all the reviews that are biased against either cover system gameplay or shock value stories, it would rate at least 8/10.